We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

Planning for the Zombie Apocalypse…

This is certain to cause much mirth:

The U.S. military has always been the one place in government with a plan, forever in preparation mode and ready to yank a blueprint off the shelf for almost any contingency. Need a response for a Russian nuclear missile launch? Check. Have to rescue a U.S. ambassador kidnapped by drug lords? Yup, check, got that covered. How about a detailed strategy for surviving a zombie apocalypse? As it turns out, check.

Awesome!

28 comments to Planning for the Zombie Apocalypse…

  • Eric Tavenner

    I heard about that one. Turns out that it was a training exercise for junior planning officers.

  • Laird

    Oh, they may play that “just kidding” or “it’s only a training exercise” routine, but when the zombies come you’ll be glad they had this “pretend” plan on the shelf! Especially important is the “chicken zombies” module, since those in the know understand that they’re real!

  • Alsadius

    Damn shame they don’t seem to have a contingency plan for “Russia starts acting belligerent towards its neighbours”. But I feel safer knowing that, after ham-fisted stumbling leads to a nuclear war, we’ll at least be protected from the shambling hordes it’ll cause.

  • William O. B'Livion

    Alsadius:

    The DoD has a plan. No, scratch that, they’ve got a filing cabinet server full of plans for that. The PRESIDENT doesn’t like any of them.

    Just like the “strategy for dealing with ISIS” or ISIL if you’re a pansy internationalist or a “radical” muslim. The DoD has one, but since it involves killing the pig fuckers in job lots the President doesn’t like it.

    Which means that *most* of the DoD plans the President won’t like because it’s the freaken DoD, killing people by the container load is sorta in their job description.

  • Regional

    Being a zombie is prime qualification to enter Congress.

  • A serious point here is that zombie films (also “take me to your leader” alien invasion stuff, “meteors heading straight for the Whitehouse” disaster stuff) is, generally, tantamount to statist propaganda.The message is always “society will instantly fall apart without the State – but don’t worry! What’s left of the government will rescue you from those awful zombies/aliens/meteors/whatever”.

    http://bogpaper.com/rocco-without-the-state-who-will-protect-us-from-zombies/

  • Laird

    Maybe, Rocco, but I still love this scene.

  • Russtovich

    “Have to rescue a U.S. ambassador kidnapped by drug lords? Yup, check, got that covered.”

    They may have a plan, but judging by past experiences *cough* Benghazi *cough* it would appear they don’t have a frickin’ clue on how to implement them.

  • The zombies changed their name to confuse the gullible. Zombie jihad is the result.

  • ‘Exclusive’ my eye – it’s been making the rounds online for at least a year.

  • Greg

    If you’re the US government or DoD and you’re asked to develop a plan for dealing with a mass, armed uprising of the citizenry, how would you describe the average citizen compared to the average US soldier or Metro police officer for that matter: slow moving (compared to the government guys), unarmed (10 round mags are essentially un-armed against what the government guys have), but there’s a boatload of them and they just keep coming. Sounds like any zombie movie I’ve ever seen. The analogy fails at the “eat-the-victim” part, but this has me wanting to read what their zombie plan is…nothing like having advanced knowledge of the other side’s plans.

  • Mr Ed

    The analogy fails at the “eat-the-victim” part

    The average Joe won’t eat a cop. But don’t most US cops have doughnuts on them?

  • Laird

    Here you go, Greg. Enjoy!

  • I particularly liked the Vegetarian Zombies scenario, groaning “grains” rather than “brains”. Winner!

  • PersonFromPorlock

    Russtovich
    August 30, 2014 at 5:17 am

    “Have to rescue a U.S. ambassador kidnapped by drug lords? Yup, check, got that covered.”

    They may have a plan, but judging by past experiences *cough* Benghazi *cough* it would appear they don’t have a frickin’ clue on how to implement them.

    In government, just having a program is everything. After all, the only cost of failure is having to accept a bigger budget.

  • Greg

    Thank you, Laird. I just KNEW that a Samizdatista would have the correct source material. Now I gotta know: did you already have that link saved or did you google it in response to my post? I’m hoping the answer is the former! :)

    Now that I’ve read (skimmed half) the Plan, I feel better that the DoD may not have a plan for dealing with a mass uprising.

    OK, gotta go…lotsa googling to do for such things as “chicken zombies”, “EMZ”, etc.

  • Laird

    Sorry, Greg, it’s the latter. Wasn’t too hard to find.

  • John de Melle

    My grandson has been playing Zombies at playschool. The other day he rushed into the kitchen and shouted at his mum, “The Zombies are coming, run for your knives”.
    My daughter did not correct him!

  • Plamus

    Laird:

    Especially important is the “chicken zombies” module…

    But did those chicken have… choppers? (wait till 4:16, although the whole thing is pretty good, and quite libertarian in spirit, apart from an annoying Che Guevara bit)

  • rxc

    As General Eisenhower once said, these plans aren’t worth the paper they are printed on. Plans never survive first contact with the enemy. However, the exercise of preparing them is priceless, because it requires all sorts of people at many levels to actually think about what they will do in the event of an actual situation.

  • Pardone

    Nice to know they are wasting taxpayer money on zombie plans. Nice how they show their contempt, to the people who pay their wages and fat contracts. Mind you, these are the people who funded “boy parties” in Afghanistan with tax dollars, and destroyed trucks and billed it to the taxpayer so they could fatten their wallets.

    As for (CIA created) ISIS, the solution is simple; destroy Saudi Arabia. Ah, but the Saudis are rich and we must bend over and take their wealthy rods up our asses.

    Unless we attack Saudi, this talk of “fighting terror” is false flag BS.

  • Ockham's Spoon

    Nice to know they are wasting taxpayer money on zombie plans.

    Did you actually read the story about this? Its a staff planning exercise! Who you say the ‘enemy’ is doesn’t matter a fuck.

    As for (CIA created) ISIS…

    And you know this how?

    Unless we attack Saudi

    Oil? Yeah who the hell needs oil!

  • Laird

    Ock, I don’t think the CIA “created” ISIS, but it’s pretty clear that it had some involvement in arming and (perhaps) training them. Not that the CIA necessarily knew that it was ISIS they were helping (or even what ISIS was), but the Obama administration’s irrational decision to assist Assad’s opponents directly resulted in the growth of ISIS. And put us in the anomalous position of assisting today the man Obama wanted to (and nearly did, but for the outcry of the American people) bomb one short year ago. Here’s a fascinating article (a bit long, but worth the read) which neatly ties up all the loose threads linking the Syrian rebels, ISIS, Benghazi, and the Obama administration (including Hillary Clinton).

    As to oil, whoever controls Saudi Arabia is going to be extracting and selling its oil. Otherwise, they wouldn’t have the cash do maintain control of that otherwise worthless sandpile (some other warlord or despot would take over). And since, as we all know, oil is fungible, I’m not terribly concerned if the House of Saud should fall. In fact, that’s long overdue.

  • but the Obama administration’s irrational decision to assist Assad’s opponents directly resulted in the growth of ISIS.

    Actually it seem like Turkey was vastly more important than the CIA, as for a while they were supporting pretty much anyone who promised to shoot at Assad. But Turkey became a great deal more ‘nuanced’ once it became clear the beast was mutating and out of control, hence the unexpected overtures to the Kurds and facilitating their oil sales.

    As to oil, whoever controls Saudi Arabia is going to be extracting and selling its oil.

    Indeed, but blowing up the Saudis will also blow up the global economy in a really really really big way. It will not be over by Christmas. So I am with Ockham on that sadly, very sadly in fact given that I loath the Wahhabis.

  • The *only* people it makes any sense whatsoever to back in Syria (if anyone) are the Kurdish YPG. They may be odious socialists but they dependably shoot at the Islamists.

  • Perry de Havilland (London)
    September 2, 2014 at 12:13 am

    If you have been following along the Saudis had one of their pet clerics denounce extremism lately. This time – for the first time I can remember – the blowback is more than the “House” of Saud can handle. Laugh or cry? Hard to say.

    And their alliance with Israel? Sixty or eighty (depending on how you count) years of policy down the drain.

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>